Legal Articles, Divorce & Family Law
Appellate Court Upholds Initial Custody Determination by State Trial Court for Child Born Out-of-State
The Appellate Court of Connecticut rejected respondent parents’ claims that the state trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction to adjudicate their minor child as neglected and commit the child to the custody of the petitioner, the commissioner of the Department of Children and Families (hereinafter commissioner).
In Divorce Action, Husband’s Appeal Dismissed Due to Repeated Instances of Contempt
As indicated in a Connecticut Appellate Court decision, a party that has engaged in repeated instances of contemptuous conduct may be precluded from pursuing an appeal. In this particular case, the parties obtained a divorce in the Judicial District of Stamford / Norwalk. At that time, the husband was ordered to pay the wife alimony in the amount of $22,000.00 per month and child support in the amount of $686.00 per week.
Lower Mortgage Rates, Without More, Do Not Constitute Substantial Change in Circumstances
In a post-judgment divorce action, the Superior Court of Connecticut, Judicial District of Stamford-Norwalk at Stamford considered a defendant’s argument that the plaintiff had a substantial change in circumstances due to her new residence in a lower cost of living area.
Husband’s Payment of SSDA Benefits in Lieu of Child Support Obligation Did Not Constitute Contempt
In a post-judgment divorce action, the Superior Court of Connecticut, Judicial District of Fairfield at Bridgeport considered a defendant’s claim that the plaintiff was in contempt of court orders for failure to support his children as outlined in their separation agreement.
State Court Declined to Adjudicate Child Custody Matter Until It Consulted With Massachusetts Court That Claimed Jurisdiction
What happens in the event where one parent files a child custody motion in one state, and the other parent files in another state? Which state should have jurisdiction to hear and decide upon the matter? In the past, such a scenario proved problematic, as frequently the two states would each adjudicate the matter and yield conflicting results. Therefore, in 1981, the U.S. Congress passed the Parental Kidnapping Prevention Act (PKPA), which required that each state apply full faith and credit to interstate custody decisions, and where more than one state vied for jurisdiction, priority would be with the home state.
Assessing the Best Interests of the Children When Considering a Request for Relocation
Assessing the Best Interests of the Children When Considering a Request for Relocation
Psychological Well-Being and Happiness of Custodial Parent Important in Determining Best Interests of a Minor Child
In a divorce action, a mother sought leave of court to relocate with her minor child from Connecticut to California against the wishes of the child’s father. This case serves as an ample example that in determining the best interests of a child, the well-being of the parent is of notable consideration.
Royalties from Book Sales Significant Income, Reconsideration of Property Division in Light of Double Dipping
In a post-judgment divorce action, the Appellate Court of Connecticut found that royalties from book sales constitute a significant source of income, and cannot be subject to both property division and alimony determinations.
Despite Earning Little Income During Marriage, Husband’s Earning Capacity Controlled Alimony and Child Support Awards
In a divorce action, the Superior Court of Connecticut, Judicial District of Fairfield at Bridgeport considered a plaintiff wife’s request to dissolve her marriage of twelve (12) years, and how to calculate child custody and alimony payments.
Court Rules that Father’s Child Support Obligation Did Not Automatically End Upon Child’s Eighteenth Birthday
A decision rendered in the Superior Court for the Judicial District of Hartford illustrates the consequences of failing to file a motion to modify child support in a timely manner. In this particular case, the parties obtained a divorce in 1994. At that time, they agreed that the husband would pay child support for their minor child. Several years later, the parties stipulated to an increase in the husband’s obligation. However, none of the agreements contained language specifying when the husband’s child support obligation would end.